Korea JoongAng Daily - Daily News from Korea

This article is by Lee Su-jeong and read by an artificial voice.

Korea's heavy industries are slowly wading into the business of building AI data centers by repurposing factory sites and core technologies to meet surging demand for their power-hungry infrastructure.

Steelmakers and shipbuilders, whose operations are already energy-intensive, are now leveraging their access to power grids and industrial land — assets that have become critical as data center developers struggle to secure adequate sites and sources of electricity.

Those in Korea's heavy industries are confident they can rise to meet the challenge.

"Whether it's retail or services, we're confident competing with anyone. Once we step in, we can change the game," a source inside the industry told the JoongAng Ilbo on condition of anonymity.

One of the biggest bottlenecks in building data centers in Korea is securing approval for power usage. Under the Distributed Energy Act, projects that consume more than 10 megawatts of electricity must undergo a grid impact assessment — a process that evaluates not only power availability but also broader social, economic and policy implications.

That has made approvals particularly difficult in the Seoul metropolitan region. According to the Korea Electric Power Corporation, 53 applications have been submitted for data center-related projects since the law took effect, but only one has been approved in the capital — and that was for backup power at an existing facility.

As a result, companies are increasingly seeking idle industrial sites that already have established access to power.

Dongkuk Steel said in February that it is reviewing investments in AI data centers and expects to make tangible progress within the year, citing its industrial sites in Incheon and Pohang as potential bases.

Hyundai Steel, which decided in January to shut down a rebar plant and a small rolling mill in Incheon, is also considering how to repurpose the land, with data centers among its options. In Pohang, a ferroalloy plant that shut down due to high electricity costs has already secured approval to be converted into a data center and is set to break ground in June.

"There is a growing consensus within companies that land with access to power has become a core asset," said a steel industry official.

Some companies are going further, expanding their business portfolios to supply equipment for data centers.

HD Hyundai Heavy Industries (HD HHI) said Tuesday it had signed a deal with U.S.-based energy infrastructure developer Aperion Energy Group (AEG) to supply power generation equipment based on its 20-megawatt HiMSEN engines, which were originally designed for marine use.

The deal, which would increase AEG's energy generation capacity by 684 megawatts and is worth 627 billion won ($424 million), marks the largest order for power generation engines in HD HHI's history.

Export prospects are also seen as strong. In countries like the United States, where power grids are less uniformly distributed than in Korea, data centers often require on-site generation capacity.

The International Energy Agency estimates that data centers will account for half the growth in U.S. electricity demand through 2030.

"With the rapid increase in data centers, demand for gas turbine power generation is rising, but supply is constrained and prices are high, creating an opening for ship engine makers," said an industry source.

Data centers also generate large amounts of heat, creating demand for structures that can handle heavy loads and support efficient cooling — which offers steelmakers increased opportunities to sell specialized materials and construction methods.

Dongkuk Steel's sales strategy highlights its ability to produce H-beams up to 3 meters (9.8 feet) wide, while Hyundai Steel is targeting not only data center structures but also related infrastructure such as transmission towers and energy storage systems.

"About 3 percent of our long steel product sales cu...

This article is by Lee Gyu-rim and read by an artificial voice.

On Tuesday at noon, some 30 university students formed a long queue — not for some viral food craze like Dubai chewy cookies, but for free food from a Buddhist temple: Yeonhwa temple, in Dongdaemun District, eastern Seoul.

The unlikely scene came as the ever-rising inflation rate and increased tuition fees lead young students to find any free food they can — even vegetarian temple meals.

"There are actually fewer people today because it is exam season," the head of public relations at Yeonhwa temple, who goes by the Buddhist name of Daegilhaeng, said Wednesday.

"We served 160 meals last week, and we even had to open the monks' dining hall, which had been closed, because there was not enough space."

The rush to Buddhist temples reflects the growing financial strain on young people, who are turning to a wide range of low-cost options, from 1,000 won (68 cents) campus meals and budget restaurant apps to free meals at temples near universities.

The social welfare foundation under the Jogye Order of Korean Buddhism also launched a free lunch program for college students last month at three temples near universities in Seoul, with all three recording one-and-a-half to two times more users than a year earlier.

The meal provided by Yeonhwa Temple on April 21 did not include any meat, but students packed the temple dining hall because the eight-dish lunch was free. The meal that day included fried seaweed rolls, seasoned bean sprouts and acorn jelly, along with fruit and yogurt. Most trays were left clean, with little food wasted.

Students said they came because they could get a meal at little or no cost.

"I didn't have high hopes as I don't usually eat veggies and it was free food," Lee Da-ye, a Kyung Hee University student, said. "But it turned out to be good now that I've tried it, and I think I'll come back."

Another Kyung Hee University student visited the temple every Tuesday despite being Protestant.

"I usually eat at restaurants around school, but paying more than 10,000 won for one meal feels burdensome, so I come here every Tuesday for lunch," the student said. "I'm grateful because it's a good program regardless of religion."

The growing demand comes as students tighten their budgets, starting with food costs, amid rising tuition and inflation.

Sixty-five percent of the 190 four-year universities in Korea raised tuition fees this year, according to the Korean Association of Private University Presidents, while consumer prices rose 2.2 percent and the cost of living index rose 2.3 percent from a year earlier in March, according to Statistics Korea.

Prices for key food items also jumped sharply over the same period, with rice up 15.6 percent, eggs up 7.8 percent and pork up 6.3 percent from a year earlier.

As a result, long lines are also forming every day for some universities' 1,000 won breakfast programs.

More than 30 students were already waiting outside a student cafeteria at Seoul National University before it opened at 7:55 a.m. on April 15.

Josephine, a student from Indonesia, was no exception.

"When I first came to Korea three years ago, a tray of eggs cost 6,000 won, but these days it is around 10,000 won, so I can really feel how much prices have gone up," she said. Josephine uses the discounted meal program about three times a week to save on food expenses.

The average number of daily users of its 1,000 won breakfast program in March rose steadily from 761 in 2024 to 792 in 2025 and 802 this year, according to Seoul National University's student affairs office.

There's even an app that is dedicated to finding and sharing offers of ultracheap meals. The Geoji Map, translated to the "Poor Map," attracted more than 1.25 million cumulative users and listed about 3,800 restaurants on its map.

"I'm living alone near the university and it's really expensive to dine out," Jeong Jin-wook, a Kyung Hee University student, said.

"So I've been visiting the ...

Kim Jung-sik

The author is an emeritus professor of economics at Yonsei University.

Korea's economy is facing the shock of "four highs": high oil prices; a weak won, as reflected in a high dollar exchange rate; high inflation; and high interest rates. Despite the possibility of a cease-fire in the Middle East conflict, tensions between Israel and Iran are expected to continue, making a return to prewar oil prices unlikely. The dollar-won exchange rate is also expected to hover in the mid- to upper-1,400 won range, and inflationary pressure from high oil prices and a weak currency is likely to rise with a lag.

Increased fiscal spending has led to higher government bond issuance, and borrowing costs in the market are already trending upward amid persistent inflation. U.S. interest rates are also expected to rise. Before the conflict, expectations leaned toward rate cuts following stable oil prices and the U.S. midterm elections in November. However, concerns about inflation have grown as global supply chains shift after the war, raising the likelihood of policy tightening. Additionally, the Middle East conflict is expected to increase U.S. national debt, pushing up yields through expanded Treasury issuance.

The combination of the four highs and rising U.S. rates poses a significant risk to Korea's economy. A deeper slowdown and expanding financial instability are key concerns. High inflation and borrowing costs tend to weaken domestic demand by reducing consumption and investment while increasing loan delinquencies. Exports are also likely to decline amid a global slowdown. At the same time, higher U.S. rates could accelerate capital outflows, further weakening the won.

To respond, policymakers have introduced fuel tax cuts and price caps to counter high oil prices and expanded fiscal spending through supplementary budgets to support domestic demand. However, challenges remain in addressing financial instability, capital outflows, inflation and exchange rate volatility.

First, macroprudential supervision must be strengthened. Unlike microprudential regulation, which focuses on individual financial institutions such as capital adequacy requirements under the Bank for International Settlements framework, macroprudential policy aims to maintain financial system stability in response to broader financial conditions. This approach draws on the "global financial cycle" theory proposed by Helene Rey, a professor at the London Business School.

According to the theory, global bank credit flows linked to cross-border capital movements are closely associated with the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX), which is influenced by U.S. interest rates. When U.S. rates rise, the VIX increases, prompting global banks to reduce lending due to heightened risk aversion. This leads to capital outflows from emerging markets. A stronger dollar also increases the debt burden of firms in those economies by depreciating local currencies.

Consequently, raising domestic interest rates alone is insufficient to prevent capital outflows. Instead, stronger macroprudential measures are needed to prevent financial crises and systemic instability. The theory also challenges the traditional "trilemma" of international finance and suggests a "dilemma" in which countries with open capital markets cannot fully maintain independent monetary policy.

Korea has previously stabilized exchange rates by imposing levies on excessive foreign currency borrowing by banks. However, the current situation differs. Capital outflows are increasing due to rising U.S. rates and growing overseas stock investments by Korean residents. This suggests the need to strengthen macroprudential oversight of securities firms, not just banks. Authorities are considering reforms to exchange-traded fund systems and tighter supervision of overseas operations by securities firms.

A gradual increase in interest rates is another policy option. While the global financial cycle limits the effectiveness of rat...

The author is the deputy editor of Content Division Three and the head of corporate research at the JoongAng Ilbo.

In the early stages of the U.S.-Israeli war against Iran, Anthropic positioned itself against the White House and the U.S. Department of Defense, calling for limits on the weaponization of artificial intelligence. Recently, however, it has emerged as a central force in what could be called the "AI fear industry."

After unveiling a new AI model in February that rattled software company stocks, the firm's founder Dario Amodei warned in a Fox News interview that within five years, half of all technical jobs could disappear, including entry-level roles for lawyers, consultants and finance professionals. Earlier this month, the company said its latest general-purpose AI, Mythos, was too dangerous for full public release, while providing preview access to about 40 organizations, including the U.S. government and major technology firms.

According to foreign media reports, the U.S. National Security Agency is already using the Mythos preview. This follows an earlier designation of by the Pentagon of Anthropic as a supply chain risk entity, raising questions about whether the move was more symbolic than substantive.

As OpenAI did after releasing ChatGPT, Anthropic appears to be using fear-driven rhetoric to establish a dominant position in the AI industry. The strategy is familiar: Warn that AI could rival nuclear weapons or destroy jobs, restrict access on the grounds of danger and then step forward as a rule-setter advocating tighter regulation.

Even if parts of these claims hold merit, the broader pattern resembles a political act shaped by fear marketing. By emphasizing AI's risks, firms simultaneously present their own systems as essential safeguards. This elevates AI to a national security asset and positions its developers to influence state and even global decision-making. Those seeking a messianic role in the AI era raise a basic question: whose interests do they serve? The answer may be straightforward. Both companies are competing to go public this year, and few narratives attract investors more than war and job disruption.

Korea, which has grown within a Western-led innovation ecosystem spanning semiconductors, the internet and AI, cannot ignore these developments. The challenge now extends beyond economics to politics and diplomacy, making the trajectory of such firms increasingly consequential.

The case of Palantir Technologies, which supplied defense AI systems to U.S. forces during the war, offers a glimpse of future dilemmas. On Saturday, the company posted a 22-paragraph summary on X of its founder Alex Karp's book "The Technological Republic" (2025). The text reads as a declaration of technological patriotism, arguing that technology should serve to protect American power and values. It includes assertions such as the end of the nuclear age and the beginning of AI-based deterrence, calls to resist what it describes as hollow pluralism and suggestions that postwar military constraints on countries like Germany and Japan should be reconsidered.

Palantir presents itself as an operating system for the U.S. government, but its ambitions extend across the broader Western alliance. As its role expands within a U.S. administration where governance itself is often questioned, allies such as Korea may increasingly face pressure to adopt these systems.

Korea's push to develop an independent AI foundation model remains important for building its own ecosystem. Yet in practical politics, doubts persist about how much such efforts can achieve. The Korean government has already sought inclusion in the Mythos preview group, reflecting both dependence and urgency.

As Silicon Valley's AI elite move onto the global political stage, Korea faces a difficult question: Can it maintain technological autonomy while upholding democratic values? The domestic political landscape offers little reassurance. The ruling party is ...

The author is a professor of law at the Seoul National University's School of Law.

"Like a lifeboat in the dark." That was how an astronaut looking back at Earth from NASA's Artemis II mission described the planet, the only apparent home for life in the vast sea of space. In that calm blue image, the wars and conflicts unfolding across the world seem to overlap in a single frame.

The value of the Strait of Hormuz has been revealed with unusual clarity in the current war. The conflict may have begun over nuclear weapons, but global attention has settled on the strait. That shift alone shows how decisive the issue of maritime passage has become.

Rules governing the sea stood at the starting point of modern international law some 400 years ago, when trade and contact between states depended overwhelmingly on sea routes. From that history emerged a basic principle: no state owns the sea, and all states enjoy freedom of navigation. That principle was reaffirmed in the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and remains central to maritime order today. New rules have developed for exclusive economic zones and the use of marine and seabed resources, but the principle governing passage itself has remained remarkably firm.

That cornerstone is now being shaken. Threats to ships evolved into demands for payment, and then into blockade-like restrictions. Transit fees on a natural strait are strange enough. More unusual still is the sight of two countries at war moving at the same time to restrict the same maritime space.

Since openly defying maritime law would be burdensome, legal justifications have followed. The law of the sea prohibits the imposition of tolls in straits. Artificial waterways such as the Panama and Suez canals can charge fees, but natural passages cannot. There is a narrow exception: If a state provides special services to passing vessels, it may collect payment for those services. Iran has seized on that point, arguing that it provides safety and environmental services to ships transiting Hormuz and should therefore be paid. The proposed charges, however, look very much like tolls in another form.

The United States has offered a careful explanation of its own. It says it is not blocking the strait itself but controlling vessels entering and leaving Iranian ports. The ports are restricted, it argues, while the strait remains open. That distinction appears designed to avoid the legal consequences of closing an international strait. Yet in practical terms, the difference is hard to see.

For now, all this is happening in wartime. Whether these measures are called tolls or blockades, one might accept that extraordinary means are being mobilized in a conflict seen as existential. The real concern begins after the war ends. There is reason to fear that some form of control over the strait could quietly take root even in peacetime. A chokepoint of such geopolitical value is unlikely to be left entirely untouched by neighboring states or great powers.

Direct tolls or formal blockades may prove too visible. Instead, more subtle "managed barriers" could emerge in the name of safety, security, the environment, resources or public health. In time, those measures could lead to selective passage.

If that barrier breaks once, the spread of similar practices to other maritime chokepoints may be only a matter of time. Even now, about 80 percent of global trade moves by sea, much of it through eight major chokepoints. The weaponization of resources is an old story. Now sea lanes themselves are joining that list. That is more dangerous. Resources involve goods that belong to particular states. Sea lanes are public goods used by all. Blocking a commodity disrupts one sector. Restricting sea lanes shakes the entire trading system.

Some propose alternative routes. Others suggest more undersea cables and pipelines. But those, too, are vulnerable to the influence of nearby powers and to external attack. They are not a fundam...

Samsung Electronics and SK hynix both posted record results for the first quarter, underscoring the strength of Korea's semiconductor industry. SK hynix reported operating profit exceeding 37 trillion won, with a striking operating margin of 72 percent, outperforming many global technology firms in profitability. The memory supercycle driven by the artificial intelligence boom has also lifted Korea's broader economy. According to the Bank of Korea, gross domestic product grew 1.7 percent from the previous quarter, the highest level in more than five years, supported by a 5.1 percent increase in exports led by semiconductors.

The rebound in growth and strong semiconductor performance are welcome. At the same time, they highlight the deepening dependence of Korea's economy on a single sector and the risk of a misleading sense of recovery. Semiconductors accounted for 55 percent of overall growth in the first quarter. Without them, growth would have been cut by more than half. Exports excluding semiconductors actually declined, suggesting that the recovery remains uneven.

Other industries tell a different story. Hyundai Motor reported an operating profit drop of more than 30 percent from a year earlier, affected by U.S. tariffs and the spillover from the Middle East conflict. While manufacturing output rose 3.9 percent, the service sector grew only 0.4 percent. The headline data suggest improvement, but the gap between sectors has widened. Additional pressure from high oil prices and a weak won is expected to emerge more clearly from the second quarter.

Against this backdrop, demands are rising across the economy. A labor union at Samsung Electronics has threatened a strike, calling for bonuses equivalent to 15 percent of operating profit. The union held a large rally at the company's Pyeongtaek facility, where its leader argued that halting production for 18 days could result in losses approaching 18 trillion won, describing this as a measure of the workers' value. In politics, competing pledges to attract semiconductor plants have also intensified ahead of local elections.

Yet the current moment calls for caution. Rather than focusing on dividing the gains from a temporary boom, the priority should be to expand the foundations for future growth. Jin Dae-je, a former president of Samsung Electronics, said in a recent interview that both the company and the country should prepare for potential downturns. The current upturn will not last indefinitely, and it is during periods of strong performance that investment in new growth engines and structural reforms should be pursued.

The semiconductor boom has provided Korea with a narrow window of opportunity. How that time is used will determine whether the current gains translate into sustained competitiveness or fade once the cycle turns.

This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.

This article is by Park Eun-jee and read by an artificial voice.

SK hynix, the primary memory supplier to Nvidia, flagged at least three more years of tight supply in high-end memory after reporting record earnings for the first quarter on Thursday. Operating profit rose 405.5 percent to 37.6 trillion won ($25.4 billion) from a year earlier, with a stunning operating margin of 72 percent.

"Customer demand for high bandwidth memory over the next three years already far exceeds the company's supply capacity," the company said during a conference call on Thursday.

"As supply shortages persist, the upcycle in memory prices is likely to last longer than in previous cycles," an SK hynix executive said.

Revenue came in at a record 52.6 trillion won, up 198.1 percent on year, driven by robust demand for dynamic random-access memory (DRAM) and NAND flash. Both operating profit and revenue topped consensus estimates compiled by market tracker FnGuide.

The feat came from an exceptionally high margin, above 70 percent, while rivals Samsung Electronics and Micron registered around 40 percent. It even beat Nvidia and TSMC, known for their industry-leading profitability, which reported margins of 65 percent and 58 percent, respectively, earlier this year.

The strong profitability reflects soaring chip prices, fueled by large-scale orders tied to AI data center infrastructure.

"We estimate the average selling prices [ASP] of DRAM rose 65 percent on quarter in the January-March period, while those of NAND are projected to have jumped 74 percent, significantly beating expectations," said Lee Su-rim, an analyst at DS Securities.

With many analysts viewing the first quarter as the start of a semiconductor supercycle, earnings are likely to strengthen further in the coming quarters.

"The pricing effect is expected to be more pronounced in the second quarter, with operating profit forecasts for server DRAM further revised upward for the second half," said Lee Jong-wook, an analyst at Samsung Securities. "The current upcycle will likely last longer than before, revising our forecast for blended DRAM ASP growth in 2027 to 12 percent annually from 9 percent. As a result, we have increased our operating profit estimates to 228 trillion won for 2026 and 284 trillion won for 2027."

The upturns typically lasted one to two years, followed by sharp downturns. SK hynix said the pattern could change as long-term contracts with U.S. Big Tech firms help stabilize demand.

"If long-term agreements become firmly established, investment efficiency is expected to improve naturally, supported by enhanced demand visibility and more stable profitability."

Google and Microsoft are each seeking such deals with SK hynix and Samsung. The deals are said to include an upfront payment of around 10 to 30 percent of the total contract value, according to Korean media reports.

In the wake of the reports, SK hynix implied that it could apply stricter terms than before. "Accordingly, we are comprehensively reviewing various approaches and structural alternatives, rather than relying on traditional long-term agreement frameworks."

The chipmaker reiterated that this year's capital expenditure will "significantly increase," although near-term capacity expansion in memory production is expected to remain limited due to floor space constraints at its facilities.

This article is by Sarah Chea and read by an artificial voice.

Hyundai Motor will unveil a China-dedicated Ioniq EV at Auto China 2026, set to kick off on Friday, aiming to catalyze a long-elusive inflection point in a market that has struggled for a decade.

With EV demand softening in Europe and the United States, China has become an indispensable arena for Hyundai — the world's largest EV market, where sales continue to remain relatively robust.

The Korean automaker will unveil the Ioniq brand's first mass-produced model for the Chinese market at the 2026 Beijing International Automotive Exhibition, running from Friday through May 3, as well as its strategies to transit to a New Energy Vehicle (NEV) brand, a classification widely used in China, denoting vehicles powered by alternative energy sources in place of internal combustion engines, including EVs, hybrids and hydrogen cars.

Hyundai will equip the new model with autonomous driving technology developed by the local firm Momenta. It has also discussed with CATL on battery technologies while joining hands with Sinopec to advance a hydrogen ecosystem.

Buoyed by robust government support and led by domestic brands such as BYD and Geely, China's EV market has been growing at a rapid pace, where NEVs now account for 54 percent of new car sales.

Hyundai, which first entered the Chinese market in 2002, is seeking an ambitious comeback after its sales plunged due to conflicts over Terminal High Altitude Area Defense systems in 2016 that sparked a consumer boycott of Korean goods.

Before the boycott, Hyundai and Kia held around 10 percent of market share, placing them as the big three with Volkswagen and General Motors. But the share dropped to just above 0.8 percent as of 2025.

Hyundai CEO José Muñoz said he plans to launch 20 China-dedicated models over the next five years, targeting sales of 500,000 units by 2030, in a new strategy called "In China, For China, To Global," specified in a letter to shareholders last month.

Kia also introduced the EV5 at the Chengdu Motor Show in 2023 and is now being mass produced at its Yancheng plant. The cars are also exported to Latin America and Australia.

This article is by Nam Soo-hyoun and read by an artificial voice.

SEJONG — Pressure is intensifying on the government's fuel price cap policy as rising global oil prices test its sustainability, even as authorities move to extend the measure to curb inflation.

The average gasoline price at gas stations nationwide stood at 2,005.39 won per liter ($5.13 per gallon) on Thursday, up 18.5 percent from 1,692.58 won recorded on Feb. 27, before the outbreak of the Iran war, according to the data from the Korea National Oil Corporation.

Though both fuels have seen sharp increases, the rise remains limited compared to global markets due to the government's price cap. Over the same period, gasoline prices in Singapore, a key benchmark for Asian oil prices, surged 49 percent, while diesel jumped 66.9 percent.

But the government on Tuesday maintained its position to continue the price cap system to alleviate the burden of inflation on consumer prices.

"As the Iran war continues and global oil prices remain unstable, the price cap is contributing to price stability and the broader economy," Yang Ki-wook, director-general of the Office of Industry, Trade and Resource Security at the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Resources, said in a briefing. "It is also playing an important role in protecting vulnerable groups and those who rely on fuel for their livelihoods, such as truck drivers and farmers."

The government said Thursday it will freeze the fourth round of maximum prices for petroleum products, set to take effect on Friday. The capped prices will remain at 1,934 won per liter for gasoline, 1,923 won for diesel and 1,530 won for kerosene, unchanged from the second round introduced on March 27.

A key concern, however, is sustainability.

The government must later compensate refiners for losses incurred under the price cap through fiscal spending, and the longer the gap between international prices and the domestic ceiling persists, the greater those losses will grow. This burden ultimately falls on taxpayers.

The government has allocated 4.2 trillion won in a supplementary budget based on a six-month implementation plan, but the exact scale of losses remains uncertain, raising the possibility of additional fiscal strain.

Another issue is that the policy has not sufficiently led to reduced energy consumption.

Weekly gasoline and diesel sales in the fourth week of March — after the price cap took effect — reached 731,000 kiloliters (193 million gallons), about 9 percent higher than a year earlier, the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy said.

"Some say consumption is actually increasing," said President Lee Jae Myung during a Cabinet meeting on April 14. Although sales declined by 13.2 percent and 11.3 percent in the first and second weeks of April compared to a year earlier, critics say the reduction is insufficient given the severity of the energy crisis. There are also concerns that an early onset of summer heat could further increase cooling demand and deepen the crisis.

"When supply is constrained, prices should rise to encourage conservation, but maintaining a price ceiling inevitably limits the effect of reducing energy use," said Yang Jun-sok, an economics professor at the Catholic University of Korea. "Continuing to import oil at high prices could worsen the trade balance and lead to inflationary pressure due to a weaker won."

Many major economies have opted to lower taxes or provide subsidies rather than directly control prices. The European Union, for instance, recently recommended measures focused on reducing oil demand, including working from home once a week, expanding public transportation subsidies and offering tax incentives for solar energy.

Seoul, however, argues that Korea is not alone in intervening in fuel prices. Data presented by the Industry Ministry showed that in Japan, gasoline and diesel prices rose about 7.3 percent and 9.4 percent, respectively, compared to before the war.

"Japan has kept increases lower...

This article is by Kim Hyoung-gu, Michael Lee and read by an artificial voice.

U.S. Forces Korea (USFK) Commander Gen. Xavier Brunson told U.S. lawmakers that he is against withdrawing U.S. troops from the peninsula during a congressional testimony in Washington on Wednesday.

He also said that Seoul and Washington aim to meet the conditions for transferring wartime operational control (Opcon) by early 2029, but he emphasized that the handover will not be rushed until conditions are met.

Speaking before the U.S. House Committee on Armed Services, Brunson said that the allies have submitted a road map to the Pentagon to meet the required conditions "not later than the second quarter of fiscal year 2029."

The U.S. fiscal year 2029 runs from Oct. 1, 2028, to Sept. 30, 2029, placing the second quarter between January and March 2029.

Brunson's remarks point to a de facto target of early 2029 for fulfilling the conditions needed to transfer wartime control of South Korean forces from Washington to Seoul — a goal that President Lee Jae Myung has pledged to achieve within his five-year term, which ends in June 2030.

But the timing of the Opcon transfer forecast by the USFK commander overlaps with the end of the current U.S. presidential term and the start of the next administration, raising the possibility that final certification could fall to the successor of current U.S. President Donald Trump.

Brunson repeatedly stressed that the transition remains strictly "conditions-based," pushing back against any suggestion of an accelerated timeline driven by political considerations.

"Accelerated COTP is not time-based," he said, referring to the conditions-based Opcon transition plan. "As the bilaterally agreed-to framework dictates, the [South Korean] military must possess specific capabilities to meet conditions for COTP."

Under the current framework, South Korea must demonstrate that it has the military capabilities needed to lead combined defense operations before regaining wartime control — a process that has already been delayed multiple times over the past decade.

Brunson said that the allies plan to review Seoul's progress in fulfilling Opcon transfer conditions at upcoming high-level meetings, including the South Korea-U.S. Integrated Defense Dialogue and the annual Security Consultative Meeting in Washington later this year.

He also struck a cautiously optimistic note on readiness, pointing to South Korea's expanding defense budget and growing military capabilities.

"I think that right now, where we stand based on the continued investments by the Republic of Korea [...] really an uplift of about 8.5 percent in their defense spending over the next three fiscal years, I think that we're in a good position," he said, referring to South Korea by its official name. "But there's still more work to be done."

Brunson noted that South Korea is pursuing "conventionally armed, nuclear-powered submarines" and that Washington "will work closely" with Seoul "to advance the requirements for that project, including avenues to source fuel."

He added that these commitments and South Korea's broader investment in security underscore its status as a "model ally."

At the same time, Brunson offered his clearest public pushback yet against speculation over a potential drawdown of U.S. forces on the peninsula.

Asked whether there could come a point where it would be reasonable for allied forces to separate or for U.S. troops to leave South Korea, he said he "would not provide that as [his] best military advice."

Instead, Brunson suggested the transition would coincide with a broader shift in the role of USFK, as Washington looks beyond the peninsula to the wider Indo-Pacific region.

He said that U.S. forces would continue to provide "essential but more limited" support for North Korea-related missions once the Opcon transfer takes place and expand their strategic focus within the region.

In his prepared testimony, Brunson described the Korean Penins...